Business Strategy and the Environment Bus. Strat. Env.

19, 356–366 (2010) Published online 20 July 2010 in Wiley InterScience ( DOI: 10.1002/bse.686

Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction?
Sukhbir Sandhu,1* Lucie K. Ozanne,2 Clive Smallman3 and Ross Cullen3

School of Management, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia College of Business and Economics, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand 3 Faculty of Commerce, Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand


ABSTRACT The role of consumers in driving organizations to be environmentally responsive is currently contentious. It is, however, important to understand the role that consumers play, because they can be a crucial pull factor for organizations. In this paper, we re-examine the role of consumers in driving business organizations to be environmentally responsive. Our analysis suggests that, despite the growth and interest in green consumerism, it has not yet matured to the stage where it is viewed by managers as driving corporate environmentalism. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Received 9 December 2009; revised 3 May 2010; accepted 24 May 2010 Keywords: consumer driven; corporate environmentalism; developing and developed countries; multiple cases

NVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS HAVE NOW MOVED FROM BEING A FRINGE ISSUE TO BECOMING A MAJOR SOCIO-ECONOMIC issue (Hart, 2007). Extant research suggests that an increasing number of businesses are responding to environmental challenges and are investing in environmentally responsive processes and products (Bendell and Kearins, 2005; Collins et al., in press; Dunphy et al., 2007). While the role of factors such as regulatory and societal pressures, in driving organizations to be environmentally responsive, is now well understood (Lawrence et al., 2006; Porter and Reinhardt, 2007; Sharma, 2001; Welford, 1998), the role of consumers however, continues to remain contentious. A host of ‘willingness to pay’ studies suggests that consumers are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products (Ottman, 1998; Rowlands et al., 2003; Shrum et al., 1995). Furthermore, consumer willingness to pay more for environment friendly products has been shown to hold true across racial (Newell and Green, 1997) and national differences (Bhate, 2002). Additionally, methodological refinements (such as discrete choice analysis – which reportedly better captures consumer preferences) continue to support this assertion (Sammer and Wüstenhagen, 2006). Consumer preference is reported to be instrumental in driving organizations towards green product development (Albino et al., 2009; Iles, 2008). Thus, the existence of powerful green consumers who can influence organizational environmental responsiveness appears to be accepted both in extant literature and in common parlance (Belz and Schmidt-Riediger, in press; McDonald and Oates, 2006; Paulraj, 2009). However, other studies find no evidence of consumer driven corporate environmentalism (Peattie, 2001; Peattie and Crane, 2005; Wong et al., 1996). A different picture of the green consumer begins to emerge when the * Correspondence to: Dr Sukhbir Sandhu, School of Management, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, ADELAIDE SA 5001, Australia. Email:
Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment


Env. According to the resource dependence theory. Pedersen and Neergaard. 2003). Researchers are thus increasingly reporting that. Celebrity consumers speaking against an organization can especially magnify this effect (Bendell and Kleanthous. 1996). we define corporate environmental responsiveness as inclusion of natural environment concerns in an organization’s process and product orientations. Thomas. the more dependent a firm is on a stakeholder for critical resources. we reexamine their role in driving business organizations to be environmentally responsive. These studies jointly paint a picture of Janus faced consumers. Product orientation includes design and development of environment friendly products. Consumers – as buyers and users of products and services – are exceptionally well placed to use the withholding strategy. Pfeffer and Salancik. qualitative research is the recommended strategy (Eisenhardt and Graebner. business organizations are dependent on stakeholders for their resource needs (Pfeffer and Salancik. Frooman. Resource dependence thus creates differentials among stakeholders. An emerging body of research suggests that consumers. 1996. Shell boycotts in the 1990s). Definition and Theoretical Framework Drawing from Hart’s seminal work (1995). because consumers can potentially act as the critical missing link that can drive organization towards proactive responsiveness. They can.1002/bse . Ozaki. important to understand the role that consumers play (or can play).. 2005. Since the Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. 1978). according to some opinion poll studies – Havas Media Reports.Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction? 357 ‘willingness to pay’ studies are contrasted with studies that trace the actual buying behaviour (Manaktola and Jauhari. 1999). consumers can also use indirect pathways. It is. are passive when it comes to translating their reported preferences into actual buying behaviour (Nes and Cramer. despite a significant percentage of consumers indicating a preference for green products (more than 90 percent. the stakeholder can walk out of the relationship with no harm to itself. Environmental responsiveness in the organizations in this study corresponds to this definition. however. at least currently. It is this dependence of firms on stakeholders for critical resources that gives stakeholders leverage over firms. This direct and indirect withholding power appears to provide consumers with considerable influence over other stakeholders (Murillo-Luna et al. other stakeholders (e. Smallbone. Methods For research questions seeking to explore ‘what’. 1999. 2005. Ottman. However. Yin. Consequently. in press. environmental NGOs. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. This viewpoint finds further support in research that reports a lack of success in green product categories (Peattie and Crane. 2007). 1978) to provide a theoretical framework for our research. As a result of the power and influence wielded by consumers. Frooman (1999) suggests that one of the most powerful strategies available to stakeholders is the withholding strategy. Given the potential significance of the consumers. In such scenarios. 2009). Regulatory and societal pressures largely act as the push factors. refuse to buy/use products from environmentally irresponsible organizations (e. 2005). who – although they report to be concerned about the environment – display an unwillingness to translate this reported preference into actual buying behaviour. consumers do not always vote with their money (Grankvist and Biel. most stakeholder models consider consumers a key stakeholder group who can – by themselves or in collaboration with other stakeholders – drive organizations towards environmental responsiveness (Anderson. 2005. 2005. if they so desire. the greater the extent to which that stakeholder can influence the firm’s response (Pfeffer and Salancik. employees) routinely seek partnerships and collaborations with them (Anderson.g. Strat. 2007). 1978). such as complaints in media and negative word of mouth – both directly to friends and families and through social networking sites. 2000). 2008).. 2007. media. ‘how’ or ‘why’ (as opposed to enumerating ‘how many’ or ‘how much’). Steger. 2007. 2008). 19.g. but environmentally aware and active consumers could act as a crucial pull factor for organizations (Dobers and Wolff. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. 2006). 2004. A withholding strategy is used when stakeholders have absolute discretion over allocation of resources. Wong et al. The role of consumers in driving organizations to be environmentally responsive thus remains unclear. investors. apart from directly withholding their purchasing power. Peattie and Crane. 2005. We draw upon the resource dependence theory (Frooman. Process orientation includes pollution control and prevention.

These transcriptions totalled 614 double spaced pages. This leads to more robust theory development (Eisenhardt and Graebner. our enquiry seeks to contribute towards theory development through an in-depth multiple case analysis. When further clarifications were needed. The strength of multiple cases lies in their capability to permit replication logic (Eisenhardt and Graebner. Replication logic thus ensures that the insights gained are not idiosyncratic to a single case but instead are consistently replicated (literally or theoretically) across multiple cases. 2007). The majority of interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. we triangulated the interview data through extensive examinations of the company websites and documents such as annual reports. we interviewed multiple respondents in an organization. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. Strat. Yin. the first step in data analysis is analysing each case individually. Forty-nine interviews were conducted over a period of 21 months from 2005 to 2007. To ensure reliability. brochures and copies of public presentations made by the respondents. business publications. follow-up questions were normally asked by email and phone. annual reports. Within case analysis involved Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. who report that securing confidentiality reduces the risk of social desirability bias. Interviewing multiple respondents provides a closer view of reality (Eisenhardt and Graebner. in situations where current theoretical developments provide conflicting accounts. Data Analysis As is recommended in inductive case study research (Eisenhardt and Graebner. sustainability reports and articles in the media. an in-depth qualitative enquiry proves to be an especially useful research strategy. This was done in accordance with the procedures suggested by Konrad and Linnehan (1995). 2002. In our interviews. Eisenhardt and Grabener (2007) and Graebner (2009) further suggest that. 19. To combat social desirability bias (Podsakoff and Organ. Yin. environmental or sustainability reports. 2003). Thus. Miles and Huberman. in 20 case study organizations. Manaktola and Jauhari. research question in this paper explores ‘How do managers view the role of consumers in driving organizations to be environmentally responsive?’. Case Selection Cases for this research were theoretically sampled from amongst the top 100 organizations (in terms of revenue) in India and New Zealand. The definition of developing and developed countries is based on the United Nations criteria (United Nations. 2007). The interviews typically took 60–90 minutes. as research (Kassaye.1002/bse . The organizations selected were actively integrating environmental responsiveness through pollution control or prevention methods and designing and developing environmentally friendly products. Research suggests that globalization has enabled the development of green consumers in both developing and developed countries (Bhate. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus.358 S. 2007). Env. we invited the participating managers to base their responses around the role of consumers as buyers and users of products (and services) and also as key stakeholders who could potentially influence other stakeholder groups. 2003). 1986). because the role of consumers in driving corporate environmentalism is currently unclear. We included organizations from India and New Zealand in this study because we sought to examine whether the role of consumers differed between organizations in developing and developed countries. Large sized firms were purposively sought. it lends itself to a qualitative exploration. Sandhu et al. 1994. 2007). Where possible. 2007. Replication logic allows the cases to be treated as a series of experiments wherein each case serves to confirm or disconfirm the inferences drawn from others. Having organizations from both developing (India) and developed (New Zealand) countries allowed us to explore the differing roles they may play. 2007. were undertaken to understand managerial perceptions of the role of consumers in driving organizations towards environmental responsiveness. managers who participated in this study were promised confidentiality. The names of the participating organizations have therefore been changed. Data Sources Interviews with senior managers – responsible for environmental issues. 2001) suggests that a primary concern of medium and large sized companies is to have a proactive stance within the community. Information about environmental responsiveness was obtained through content analysis of corporate websites.

It has a consumer base of more than 700 million (spanning both rural and urban populations) and annual sales exceeding US$3 billion. Env. No. when we started doing it. Cross case analysis was commenced after the within case analysis had been completed. to not highlight the environmental benefits of their green products. Perceived role of consumers as drivers of environmental responsiveness in organizations in India Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. Consumers have not demanded this. lack of consumer demand for environmental attributes. has led Endeavour against positioning these products as environment friendly. Organization Illustrative examples of environmental initiatives Managerial perceptions about role of consumers Consumers will not buy a product because it is more environmentally friendly. not from the consumers. Strat. Despite having developed these products (with clear environmental benefits).1002/bse . the case study organizations were examined for similarities and differences. There is no consumer demand for that. as reported by participating managers.Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction? 359 developing detailed case histories for each of the organizations. The analysis process was iterative and took eight months to complete. We commence our discussion with the case analysis of Endeavour. a major environmental problem in India. No demand from consumers. There is not a demand from the consumers for the environmentally friendly products. no. This case is particularly illustrative of the lack of consumer influence. tree extract) based ecologically friendly fertilizer • Water based adhesives (replacing harmful solvent based adhesives) • Environment friendly packaging Table 1. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. Endeavour in fact presents a curious paradox. This rich familiarity with each individual case allowed the unique patterns for each individual case to emerge fully without being influenced and constrained by the patterns of other cases. Endeavour has also developed a soap bar that has been made without minerals: NIL MIL Bar. wherein an organization has developed green products but does not position the products as environment friendly in the marketplace! Endeavour is amongst the largest fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies in India. This decision. 19. The NIL MIL Bar reduces silting in water. Cross case analysis assisted us in broadening the frame of reference and systematically proceeding beyond initial impressions. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. No. Endeavour has successfully developed a detergent that is phosphate free and uses only half the amount of water needed by conventional detergents. The findings and insights obtained from within and cross case analysis are discussed below. Endeavour’s documents report that their products ‘touch the life of two out of three Indians’. Endeavour (FMCG) ICLL (pulp and paper) Cosmos (steel) Valiance (petrochemical) Cottex (textile) • • • • • • • • • • • Phosphate free detergent Mineral free soap bar Chlorine free paper Sustainable forestry Industrial ecology Recycled steel Lower emission fuels Sun (fertilizer) Organochem (chemical) Mayer (electronics) Environment friendly dyes Hemp based clothing Organic cotton clothing Neem (natural. as perceived by managers. No. was arrived at after extensive market research. For cross case analysis. Findings Findings in India Our data reveal that none of the managers in the eight case study organizations in India reported any consumer influence to be environmentally responsive (Table 1). in driving organizations to be environmentally responsive. There was no consumer demand. nothing from the farmer’s side.

That kind of awareness has not happened in the Indian market as yet. We have such a large consumer base and we do regular consumer research. Company documents reveal that. Our research indicates that at least about 60–65 percent of their discretionary income. People still would not buy a product because it is more environmentally friendly. If we sell it saying it is environment friendly. we will not advertise it in that manner. ICLL has also been successful in initiating sustainable forestry programs. the consumer may not want it. but the fact remains that people still don’t see it to be good detergent. they say that our detergent is more eco friendly and things like that. instead of having to carry two or more buckets of water (from a distant well or river). as opposed to the western practice of washing clothes using washing machines. There are other companies who actually came in wanting to exploit this whole use of non-phosphate detergents. We won’t tell people that this is what we are doing for the environment. the woman of the house has to now carry only one bucket of water1 – an obvious and relevant consumer advantage. therefore we are able to know what consumers really want. have shorter felling cycles and can be grown in wastelands. the Director. Ltd and ERP Environment . The current situation faced by many Indian consumers has thus lead Endeavour to decide against highlighting the environmentally beneficial attributes of its new detergent. Environment Health and Safety – Endeavour). 19. He states that. despite Endeavour having developed a green product. So while we are doing it. Findings at ICLL reinforce this. Environment Health and Safety – Endeavour).3 million retail outlets it has an extensive distribution system. It is the first company in India to have developed chlorine-free paper. Environment. (Director. We impact the lives of people right from the time they get up in the morning and sleep in the night – in terms of offering our products which they use. at Endeavour believes that consumers currently have a perception that environment friendly goods are of low quality and perceives that they will not buy a product on the basis of its environmental attributes. they are not able to sell it. Through developing an alternative source of pulp they claim to protect the virgin forests from deforestation. In fact they may reject it outright. We have seen it from our experience with competitors. Bus. Sandhu et al. ICLL is a conglomerate and has diversified businesses. after extensive consumer research. This involves developing eucalyptus clones that yield more pulp.1002/bse Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. It must be mentioned here that the normal practice of washing clothes in India involves manual washing (using water in buckets). This massive scale of operations has necessitated a sophisticated consumer research division: We are a three billion dollar company in India and we have got distribution counters in almost every nook of the country. Health and Safety (EHS). (Director. ICLL has also developed the replacement of hazardous metal-based inks with 1 Despite the rural setting of this advertisement.360 S. Endeavour’s detergent targets both the urban and the rural consumers. In addition. gets spent on Endeavour’s products. Strat. Endeavour has chosen to promote the new detergent through advertisements that show that. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. they dare not position it as environment friendly: We will be wiped out if we start doing that kind (environment friendly) of advertising in India. Therefore. and with more than 6. This perceived high level of consumer understanding has led Endeavour to promote its new environment friendly detergent on the basis of convenience offered (have to carry less water) – a currently more salient attribute as reported by managers – rather than promoting it as a phosphate free environment friendly detergent. Env. If you are not able to sell of course you cannot remain in the business.

These findings were also reported at Mayer (an electronic manufacturer). managers at Valiance did not report any consumer demand or pressures for these innovations. Hercules. Valiance (a petrochemical business) had innovated fuels with lower emissions. specifies that none of these measures were a result of perceived consumer demand: No. The furniture is certified as being sustainable and is aimed at alleviating Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. Findings in New Zealand Our findings in New Zealand closely mirrored the findings obtained from the case study organizations in India. Similarly. . (Vice President. . the manager at Amity (a food manufacturer). The responses of the case study organizations in India are summarized in Table 1. believes that consumers are currently motivated more by price than by the environmental attributes of products: The motivation for purchasing a product in the supermarket shelf is based on price. Mayer. For instance. 19. However. I think consumers in India have got very late and have been left behind in demanding that. these environmentally beneficial new products have been developed despite the perceived absence of consumer demand: Even if we were not environmentally responsible. informants at Organochem (a chemical manufacturer) explain that a new process aimed at replacing solvent based adhesive with water based adhesives was initiated without any consumer demand for this. Central Utilities and Engineering – Cottex). Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. Environment Health and Safety – ICLL). Or take our ECF paper. None of the managers in the case study organizations. so it’s not as if we face consumer demand . and your competitor doesn’t. a retail chain business. If you have a label on your product that says it was produced environmentally sustainably.Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction? 361 water-based inks in printing and has pioneered a chain of environment friendly hotels. None of the managers in the 12 case study organizations in New Zealand credited any aspect of their environmental responsiveness to the direct influence of the final consumer (Table 2). Sun – a fertilizer manufacturer – had introduced a Neem based fertilizer. (Director. Strat. which had introduced changes in packaging process that eliminated the use of methyl bromide for fumigation. A detailed cross case analysis revealed that these product and process innovations were driven by pressures such as internationalization requirements and the necessity to meet supply chain criteria – especially when exporting to developed countries (Cottex. Organochem. without any perceived consumer mandate. The environmental director. Env. Cosmos). informants explained that they did not perceive any pressure from the consumers for developing this fertilizer. which has developed biodynamic product lines. Sun) or by top management commitment and deep-rooted organizational values (Endeavour. Cosmos – a steel manufacturer – had introduced steel made of recycled inputs and engaged in industrial ecology. It is also engaged in producing environmental friendly dyes. has in conjunction with Greenpeace. There is not a demand from the consumers for the environmentally friendly products. Similar to Endeavour’s experience. Nor is there any consumer demand for that. but your competitor is significantly cheaper to your price that is a higher motivator for the end consumer. We do not really get a very high premium on that. ICLL. Cottex is a textile manufacturer and has introduced environment friendly fabrics. Neem is a natural derivative and is ecologically less damaging than synthetic fertilizers. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. Elemental chlorine free paper. reported consumers as directly influencing the environmental responsiveness. Once again. Finally.1002/bse . we could still sell our hotel rooms. Valiance. however. introduced hardwood furniture made from sustainable forestry practices. however. (Corporate Manager Environment Health and Safety – Amity).

Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. However. the manager at Hercules refers to the ambiguity between the willingness to pay and actual buying behaviour of consumers: Consumers say one thing. an arguably sensitive product feature for many consumers. The United Nations treats Western Sahara as a disputed issue and New Zealand is only the second country that has been found to have imported phosphates from Western Sahara. 19. There is a dissonance between what consumers say and what they do. Strat. not from the consumers as such. Table 2. This range was introduced after market research suggested an interest in this initiative. In response to these protest movements Sunrise had invested in manufacturing fertilizers that would use human waste as an input. No consumer pressure. Sunrise imports these phosphate rocks from Western Sahara. Sunrise (fertilizer) Skyes (construction) Amity (food industry) Hercules (retail chain) Atlas (dairy) Phoenix (electricity generation) Fabio (food distribution) Solitaire (mining) • Sustainable hard wood furniture • • • • • • • • • • Reduced packaging foods LCA Renewable electricity Reduced packaging Smokeless pellets Investing in research on low emission coal Producing electricity from landfill gases Removed lead and chromium from electronic products LCA Renewable energy sources We do not face any demand from the end consumer. Env. No. The demand for this sustainable furniture range has however been lacklustre. Organization Illustrative examples of environmental initiatives • Invested in human waste based fertilizer • ENVIRO: A revolutionary new product that prevents nitrogen leaching • Developed medium density fibre boards with extremely low levels of formaldehyde • Organic and biodynamic foods Managerial perceptions about role of consumers The consumers are hypocrites. In attempting to explain this.1002/bse . Sunrise faces severe opposition from protest groups against the social and environmental consequences of importing phosphate rocks from a forcefully occupied region. No direct pressure from consumers. Nothing from consumer side. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. which has been forcefully occupied by Morocco since 1975. The motivation for purchasing a product in the supermarket shelf is based on price. despite the fact that this fertilizer was proven to be scientifically safe. Currently. Marion (electricity distribution) Waite (electronic and defence equipment) Keratin (wool scouring) Shield (petrochemical) No role of consumer. The manager at Sunrise very bluntly dismisses consumer driven corporate environmentalism: The consumers are hypocrites. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. there is a dissonance between what consumers say and what they do. Sandhu et al. Sunrise derives one of the inputs required to make fertilizers from phosphate rocks. Not anything from consumers. Perceived role of consumers as drivers of environmental responsiveness in organizations in New Zealand deforestation of rainforests. but do another. No demand from consumers. Sunrise – a fertilizer manufacturer – presents a particularly interesting case. Sunrise faced enormous difficulties in getting this human-waste-based fertilizer accepted by the final consumers and it chose to withdraw from this project. There is a gap. Not from end consumers. (Corporate Social Responsibility Manager – Hercules).362 S.

356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. that a business like ours does wonder what is the worth in doing this? (General Manager. Strat. This perceived lack of consumer interest in environmental attributes has led some of the case study organizations to elect against highlighting the environmental attributes of their products. the managers in our research did not report consumers as influencing environmental responsiveness in their organizations. Cross case analysis revealed that New Zealand case study organizations were largely driven by regulatory and societal (in form of protest groups and environmental NGOs) pressures. The New Zealand managers mainly reported compliance with environmental regulations and pressures from protest groups such as environmental NGOs. an interesting anomaly emerges. when we contrast the observations of the managers in our study with the experiences of some prominent business organizations (such as Body Shop. which have been selected from across a range of industries. Managers in our research thus do not agree with the prevalent popular notion that consumers are the panacea that attracts organizations towards environmental responsiveness. These findings are supported in research by Thogersen (2006) and Baker and Sinkula (2005). managers in the New Zealand case study organizations did not perceive consumers as currently having a role in influencing their product and process environmental responsiveness. instead they suggest that the search for green consumers is proving to be frustrating and elusive. The majority of these businesses (which have been founded around an explicit social–environmental charter by entrepreneurs who report a deep rooted commitment to these issues) are successful examples of socio-environmental marketing (Bendell. in the mass market. they are thinking somehow of warm fluffy clean and green but not actually recognizing that there’s six billion people in the world who have an interface with the environment and closing the loop makes sense. Ltd and ERP Environment . economic and institutional differences). This is the irony – by the final market place. The responses of the managers in the other nine case study organizations in New Zealand reflected very similar experiences and have been summarized in Table 2. it is stunningly hypocritical because they are not thinking of total lifecycles. can indeed result in organizations deliberately maintaining a low profile for their environmental product range and in not highlighting environmental benefits of their products. much of the popular and academic literature suggests that consumers are key drivers of corporate environmentalism. Env. Innocent Drinks. They don’t want to close the loop and this puts so many barriers to closing the loop.Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction? 363 It is hugely hypocritical. Strategic Development – Sunrise). Our research is however limited by the fact that we focussed on larger organizations in both India and New Zealand and did not include market segmentation. 2009). but not if it is human based. who suggest that current lack of consumer demand for environmental attributes. Proposition: managers do not currently view consumers as a driving force for corporate environmental responsiveness. Therefore. Discussion As discussed in the introduction. The final market place likes clean and green. social. It becomes quite a selfish market place in some ways. Edun fashions). Reminiscent of our findings in India. Based on our findings we therefore propose the following.2 These observations were consistently replicated across all 20 case study organizations. and which span both developing and developed countries (which in turn are characterized by political. However. Bus. 19. To the contrary. 2 The managers in the case study organizations attributed environmental responsiveness to a variety of external pressures.1002/bse Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. they suggest that consumers are currently uninterested in environmental attributes and are not actively engaged in buying and supporting environment friendly products or processes. The majority of managers in India thus reported that environmental responsiveness was becoming a necessary precondition for internationalization and also for meeting supply chain criteria – especially when exporting to developed countries.

for the majority of consumers. Business Strategy and the Environment. In The corporate responsibility movement: five years of global corporate responsibility analysis from Lifeworth. Business Strategy and the Environment 14(6): 372–383. Bendell J. and that at the same time offer significant additional benefits ( 3). 2001). Sandhu et al. The success of these businesses clearly indicates that. Bendell J. Case studies of businesses such as Patagonia suggest that environmental attributes. The emergence of the corporate responsibility movement. Deeper Luxury: Quality and Style when the World Matters. Instead. 2001). socio-environmental issues are an important purchase determinant. we suggest that drivers of corporate environmentalism are better captured in the social movement conceptualization (Bendell. Kearins K. 3 Especially products that do not involve major tradeoffs in terms of performance and convenience (Peattie. References Albino V. Thus. environmental concerns may not currently translate into environmental purchase behaviour. The social movement advocates that proactive business leaders along with civilsociety partnerships should lead the way. Environmental marketing strategy and firm performance: effects on new product performance and market share. The implications of our findings for research highlight the need for stakeholder models to re-image the relationships with consumers. 2010. Bendell J.). Competing with soft issues – from managing the environment to sustainable business strategies. Bhate S. Environmental strategies and green product development: an overview on sustainability-driven companies. 2001–2005. In press. 2002. Green products (as they might involve internalizing the externalities) are often more expensive than conventional substitutes and are perceived by some consumers to underperform on many product attributes (Ottman. http://www. price and performance considerations take precedence over environmental attributes (First and Khetriwal. 2001). can be an effective positioning strategy (Meyer. Our research has implications for both managers and researchers. We therefore suggest a remodelling of stakeholder models that view consumers as the linchpin of corporate environmentalism. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. 2005. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing. 2009). For managers who are grappling with this dilemma. 2005). 2005. In press. Thus.1002/bse . Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33(4): 461–475. Dangelico RM. Business Strategy and the Environment 9(3): 143–150. in the actual buying behaviour of many consumers. Meaningful change can be brought about only when businesses move beyond ‘the sum of the narrow self-interests of consumers.g. for a large number of consumers and across a wide range of product categories. Sinkula JM.364 S. Anderson DR. Consequently. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. Belz F-M. 2008. However. p. investors or employees’ (Bendell. Env. cosmetics with fewer harmful additives etc). Balice A. 2009. 2009. iUniverse: New York. Lawrence S. A large number of managers may therefore struggle to find evidence of consumer preference for green products. 2009.wwf. Strat. Products aimed at public consumption (e. Corporate Survival: the Critical Importance of Sustainability Risk Management. one vision: are we close to achieving this? An exploratory study of consumer environmental behaviour across three countries. Sustainability practices: trends in New Zealand businesses.g. Bendell J (ed. Schmidt-Riediger B. Kleanthous A. 2008). Marketing strategies in the age of sustainable development: evidence from the food industry. Wolff despite many stakeholder models positing consumers as being in a privileged position with regards to driving corporate environmentalism. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2(2): 169–184. 2002). 19. Peattie. Business Strategy and the Environment. when stressed subsequent to the product traits desired by consumers (such as performance. This re-imaging can assist in providing a more accurate characterization of stakeholder models and relationships for firms that focus on environmental aspects of their products and processes. price and quality). hybrid cars) and that may be associated with reputational and status enhancement possibilities can be another such category (Ratner and Kahn. The political bottom line: the emerging dimension to corporate responsibility for sustainable development. we suggest that while. 1–47. Collins E. Meyer. for a certain percentage of green consumers (and for certain categories of products3). 2001). Roper J. One world.html [19 April 2010]. organic foods. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. 2000. price and performance appear to be an overriding purchase criterion (Peattie and Crane. opportunities to elicit consumer collaboration can still be identified. 2007. Business Strategy and the Environment 18(2): 83–96. managers however report that consumers (at least currently) are not using this power to drive organizations into being environmentally responsive. 2005. Dobers P. one environment. Baker WE. a market strategy aimed at educating consumers about the additional environmentally beneficial attributes and reassuring consumers about delivering on the price and performance criterion may help in tapping latent demand (Ottman.

2001. Wüstenhagen R. Business Strategy and the Environment 16(6): 421–429. McDonald S. Environmental motivations: a classification scheme and its impact on environmental strategies and practices. Graebner ME. Thomas TE. Influencing product lifetime through product design. Sharma S. 1995. Kahn BE. Green Marketing: Opportunity for Innovation.asp?def_code=491 [27 June 2007]. Formalized HRM structures: coordinating equal employment opportunity or concealing organizational practices? Academy of Management Journal 38(3): 787–820. Organ DW. 2005. 2010. Ottman JA. Immediately. 1998. Parker P. Pavlovich K. 19. 1995. Harper and Row: New York. The impact of environmental information on professional purchasers’ choice of products. Strategic Management Journal 29(11): 1225–1240. Kassaye WW. 2007. McCarty JA. 2006. CA. 2003. United Nations. Earth and Humanity. 1997. Linnehan F. Reinhardt FL. Sustainability: consumer perceptions and marketing strategies.havasmedialab. Salancik GR. 2005. Neergaard P. Journal of Advertising 24(2): 71–82. Rowlands IH. Biel A. Iles A. 2009. Huberman AM. Havas Media Reports. Consumers and green electricity: profiling potential purchasers. Business Strategy and the Environment 15(3): 157–170. Collins E. Adopting sustainable innovation: what makes consumers sign up to green electricity? Business Strategy and the Environment. Hart SL. Can market transformation lead to sustainable business? A critical appraisal of the UK’s strategy for sustainable business. Business Strategy and the Environment 17(8): 524–535. Sustainability practices of SMEs: the case of NZ. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 31(1): 53–69. Porter ME. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 19(5): 364–377. Business Strategy and the Environment 15(4): 242–257. Ozaki R. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. Ottman Journal of Management 12(4): 531–544. Env. Hart SL. Ratner [2 December 2009]. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Caveat emptor – let the buyer beware! Environmental labelling and the limitations of green consumerism. 2009. http://unstats. Exploring consumer attitude and behaviour towards green practices in the lodging industry in India. Nes NV. Business Strategy and the Environment 14: 186–197. 1994. 2007. Green dilemma. Business Strategy and the Environment 15(3): 185–199. 2001. Peattie K. 1999. Marketing Intelligence and Planning 19(6): 444–455. Business Strategy and the Environment 10(4): 187–199. 2004. Strat. Business Strategy and the Environment 15(1): 15–29. 2007. Griffiths A. Steger U. Newell SJ. Scott D. Podsakoff PM. United Nations Common Database. Graebner ME. Crane A. In press. Pfeffer J. Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and their implications for advertising strategy. Qualitative Data Analysis: an Expanded Sourcebook. Shifting to green chemistry: the need for innovations in sustainability marketing. Oates CJ. farce or prophecy? Qualitative Market Research: an International Journal 8(4): 357–370. 2001. NJ. Business Strategy and the Environment 15(3): 145–156. Frooman J. The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behaviour. Smallbone T. A natural resource based view of the firm. Miles MB. Thogersen J. 2007. Academy of Management Journal 52(3): 435–472. Shrum LJ. What’s in it for the customers? Successfully marketing green clothes. 2006. 2006. 2006. NTC: Chicago. Routledge: London. Different strokes: regulatory styles and environmental strategy in the North American oil and gas industry. 2008. Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer.un. Wharton: Upper Saddle River. 2001. Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges. Journal of Consumer Research 29(2): 246–257. Sage: Thousand Oaks. Jauhari V. The influence of eco-labelling on consumer behaviour – results of a discrete choice analysis for washing machines. Are business students buying it? A theoretical framework for measuring attitudes toward the legitimacy of environmental sustainability. 1995. Business Strategy and the Environment 12(1): 36–48. Academy of Management Review 24(2): 191–205. 2005. First I. Cramer J. Murillo-Luna JL. 2007. This is a Staff Announcement – Could the Head of Sustainability Please Come to the Check Out Area. Peattie K. Business Strategy and the Environment 5(4): 252–268. Business Strategy and the Environment 10(6): 344–364. Arunachalam M. Grankvist G. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. Racial differences in consumer environmental concern. 2008. Paulraj A. Exploring the relationship between environmental orientation and brand value: is there fire or only smoke? Business Strategy and the Environment 19(2): 90–103.1002/bse . 1978. Rivera-Torres P. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. A strategic approach to climate. Lawrence S. Stakeholder influence strategies. 2008. Sammer K. Eisenhardt KM. 2002. Business Strategy and the Environment 13(2): 96–106. Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability (2nd edn). 2007. Harvard Business Review 5(10): 22–26. IL. The five simple rules of green marketing. Manaktola K. Business Strategy and the Environment 18(7): 453–468. Green marketing: legend. Lowrey TM. Business Strategy and the Environment 10(5): 317–330. Pedersen ER. 2009. Academy of Management Review 20(4): 986–1014. Benn S. Media attention and the market for green consumer products. 2007. 1996. The External Control of Organizations. Meyer A. myth. Managerial issues in closing the loop. Green CL. Garces-Ayerbe C.Consumer Driven Corporate Environmentalism: Fact or Fiction? 365 Dunphy D. Khetriwal DS. http://www. Capitalism at the Crossroads: Aligning Business. 1986. Academy of Management Journal 50(1): 25–32. 2006. Design Management Review 19(4): 65–69. Caveat venditor: trust asymmetries in acquisitions of entrepreneurial firms. Konrad AM. Business Strategy and the Environment 14(5): 286–299. Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach.

Strat. Stoneman P. CA. 1996. Marketing strategies and market prospects for environmentally-friendly consumer products. Ltd and ERP Environment Bus. British Academy of Management 7(3): 263–281. technology and sustainable development: postmodern perspectives and the need for a critical research agenda. Sandhu et al. Turner W. 356–366 (2010) DOI: 10. Case Study Research: Designs and Methods (3rd edn). Editorial: Corporate environmental management. 19. 2003. Wong V. Welford RJ.366 S.1002/bse . Env. Business Strategy and the Environment 7(1): 1–12. Yin RK. 1998. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons. Sage: Thousand Oaks.